I was recently told by the DSA of my org that it was “very out-ethics” of me to read “entheta” on websites written by critics of the Church of Scientology. When asked why, she told me that it was considered by the Church “supporting” suppressive persons, and would hence be suppressive in itself. When asked what LRH reference this was according to, she quoted HCO PL – SUPPRESSIVE ACTS, SUPPRESSION OF SCIENTOLOGY AND SCIENTOLOGISTS.
When asked what she meant by “etheta”, she explained that this would include any statements that are against Scientology or Scientologists. I told her that I understood why it’s usually best to avoid such things; however, it didn’t make sense to me why this needed to be enforced on me. Shouldn’t I be allowed to confront anything I wanted, and make my own determination whether to accept it or not? Besides, what if some of the accusations were true? She just re-iterated that this is the viewpoint of the Church, and then asked me to sign an attest that I would no longer visit such websites.
She then proceeded to have me read various “dead agent” material on the websites I had visited. I read through them expecting to get some answers to the questions that had been raised. However, a majority of the material she gave me was only aimed at attacking the reputation of the sources of these websites. [This is an tactic called “argumentum ad hominem”, which is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by discrediting the person supporting it.] This did not effectively clear up any of the “lies” that these sites were supposedly telling. This seemed strange to me, because it was my understanding that you handle black PR with the truth. I wasn’t really interested in the reliability of the sources. What I wanted was the truth, not more entheta!
For instance, when asked how somebody like Marty Rathbun could end up getting declared, I expected to get some proof that he was “No Case Gain”, or that he has been committing continual overts against Scientology. What she explained instead was how he has been auditing in the field without being trained as an auditor, and how “squirrel” he therefore is. I thought that was very strange. How could someone that high up in Scientology, especially someone who was supposed to have audited Tom Cruise, not be auditor trained? She then went on to explain to me how she isn’t trained either! That was her explanation!
When I asked her why our “ideal” org had such abysmal delivery stats (an avg. of three releases and four student completions a month) despite having over a hundred staff and such a huge building, I expected to hear about how there is a some major plan to handle it immediately. Instead, she just discussed how the area’s PR has really improved and tried to explain to me how it takes a long time to build a St. Hill-size org. Of course, that is completely contradictory to the purpose of the Ideal Org Program, which promised “unprecedented expansion.”
This started me thinking about the relationship of “theta” and “entheta” to truth and lies. How is it that the truth, no matter how difficult to confront, can be considered ehtheta? And how is it that lies, no matter how comforting, can be considered theta? Wouldn’t I rather know the truth, than some fluffy PR that makes me feel happy and cheerful? Some may say that “ignorance is bliss” but that certainly is not the viewpoint of a Scientologist!
It was my decision to search out the truth that led me to begin exploring the internet. It had gotten to the point where my questions were legion, and I was not able to get them answered on the regular channels. So, I sought information from the best source on the planet – the internet. It might have been upsetting at times, it might have shaken some of my stable data; but, I was willing to sort through whatever entheta or lies there were to find the truth!
How does one determine truth from lies? Data evaluation and judgment! But, the Church doesn’t seem to trust me to read such information and form my own opinions. I am sent to the Ethics Officer if I but read anything derogatory about Scientology on the internet without reporting it to the DSA. I am Sec Checked if I voice anything against the Church myself. And I am threatened with expulsion simply for seeking the truth.
How anti-Scientology can you get! I am a Scientologist! I am Data Series trained! I am an intelligent, aware being! Why couldn’t I be trusted to read any information and sort out for myself what is true and what is not? My certainty on Scientology is not so tenuous that it will wither before a little criticism. And my case is not so fragile that it cannot stand up to whatever information I may find. But the Church doesn’t trust me to make my own investigation and come to my own conclusions.
Was the DSA really concerned about my case and what will happen if I come in contact with entheta? Or does the Church have something to hide?
If they had simply answered my questions, and admitted to what needed improvement, I would not have continued to pull strings. I would not have sought alternative sources of information. But, the first thing you learn about investigation is to “look, don’t listen.” And the more I looked, the more I dug for the truth, the deeper and deeper I delved into the rabbit hole, until…“Ahah!” The truth! May it truly set me free!